R v Devonald [2008] EWCA Crim 527

Facts

  • Mr. Devonald posed as a young woman online to contact his daughter’s former boyfriend.
  • His objective was to expose the ex-boyfriend’s alleged improper behaviour.
  • Devonald induced the victim to perform humiliating acts via webcam, which he recorded.
  • The prosecution focused on whether the messages sent were “indecent, obscene, or threatening” under Section 127(1)(a) of the Communications Act 2003.
  • Dispute centered on whether the jury should consider the recipient’s reaction to the message.

Issues

  1. Whether Section 127(1)(a) of the Communications Act 2003 requires proof of the sender’s specific intent to cause annoyance, inconvenience or unnecessary worry.
  2. Whether the assessment of “indecent, obscene, or threatening” communication hinges on the sender’s conduct and intent, or the recipient’s subjective reaction.
  3. Whether evidence of the victim’s emotional response is necessary for conviction under Section 127(1)(a).

Decision

  • The Court of Appeal overturned the original conviction.
  • It held that the proper test is an objective consideration of the message’s content and the sender’s intent, not the recipient’s subjective feelings.
  • The court clarified a message may be threatening, indecent or obscene regardless of the victim’s personal reaction.
  • The sender’s intention is central for offences under Section 127(1)(a).
  • The court rejected the argument that the victim’s personal interpretation or response was decisive.

Legal Principles

  • Proof of the sender’s intent to cause annoyance, inconvenience, or unnecessary worry is required for conviction under Section 127(1)(a) of the Communications Act 2003.
  • The jury must objectively assess the nature of the message and the purpose behind its sending.
  • Offending communications are evaluated by reference to their objective features and the sender’s state of mind, rather than the recipient’s subjective response.
  • Online deception and use of a false identity do not shield a defendant from liability if the intent to cause harm is established.

Conclusion

The decision in R v Devonald [2008] EWCA Crim 527 establishes that, under Section 127(1)(a) of the Communications Act 2003, liability depends on the sender’s intent and the objective content of electronic messages, not the recipient’s individual feelings. This ruling provides clear guidance for the prosecution of online harassment and deception cases.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal